For the past five years, a sect of Intel's Research and Development group has
been devoting their time to engineering a brand new line of computing
architectures, which they code-named the Itanium. The Itanium development group
has publicized their goals and intentions from the start, which, while allowing
their corporate customers to know what to expect in the coming years, has also
led rise to the `copycat' industry headed by the leading Asian manufacturer of
bargain-basement generic chips, AMD.

Intel's main goal in designing the Itanium was to bring a
brand new line of x86 technology to the enterprise world, in the form of 64-bit
computing. This, in essence, brings datacenter servers to the power level of
the Nintendo 64, a goal that has only been reached under terse and supervised
conditions inside frigid IBM and Intel labs. Meanwhile, Intel has promised a
brand new instruction set for the Itanium, dubbed EPIC (Enhanced Processor
Instructional Computation), which theoretically allows a user to open up a file
of up to 64 gigabytes in size in Notepad. The Itanium processor will also
feature on-board L1, L2 and L3 caches, with an OEM optional L4 addition. The
addition of L3 and L4 cache not only allows the simultaneous download of
web pages up to 4Mb in size, but uploading as well. The new Itanium line
of processors is clearly aimed at their largest enterprise consumers.

Meanwhile, AMD, having
based their previous "successes"
on Intel chips, decided to beat the market-leading Intel to the punch on 64-bit
computing. But how, you ask? Clearly, they can't just steal five years of
research from Intel. Well, clearly they could, because they have done it in the
past. This time, however, they decided to implement a quick hack to their
current line of stolen architectures. The Hammer, as it was leaked from AMD,
was born. It does not take a brain surgeon to see what this code-name implies.
Asian Manufacturing Devices has long been criticized for their sweatshop labor
in small Asian factories, and as a slap in the face of the American way of
life, they name their next chip after the Hammer and Sickle, the very symbol of
Communism.

Enough about AMD's practices, as there are plenty of
fraudulent factors in the development of the "Hammer" processor. Since AMD
realized that they would be playing catch-up to the years and years of research
spent on the Itanium, they cut corners in several crucial areas. The processor
itself is merely a hacked 32-bit processor with 64-bit add-ons. The "system
memory bus hub" will be running on a technology licensed from Motorola dubbed
HTT (HyperText Transport). This technology is aimed squarely as a competitor to
the Itanium's onboard L3 and L4 cache, as it also allows for simultaneous 4Mb
uploading and downloading of web pages. The Hammer processor will also
support DDR (Double Density RAM) of up to 2.7 gigabytes (2700 megabytes). This
is hardly an achievement over the Itanium, however, as Intel's next offering
supports up to 64 gigabytes of SSR (Single Sided RAM), the faster
variant of the two for obvious physical reasons.

So, what is it about the announcement of Intel's latest
"Yamhill" offerings that has AMD supporters up in arms? When Intel pledged to
bring their EPIC chipset to the Pentium 4 line, many AMD zealots felt like they
lost the only edge they have ever had in the processor arena. Never has AMD
created something for themselves that is superior to Intel technology, it has
always been second rate hacked technology that their engineers stole from
secret Intel laboratories. So, imagine their giddy grins when they learned of
the Sickle and Hammer, something that they could finally claim to be first to
market with. Unfortunately for them, however, Intel has been porting their EPIC
instruction set to the Pentium 4 core for two years, much longer than AMD has
spent cobbling together their hacked x86-64 memory bus. Thus, to the shortsighted,
it must be seen as "theft."

I am willing to bet this diary entry won't have more than 50 comments on it, unlike the "My Conversation With Tim Matthews" entry.

Which is too bad, really; I am beginning to expect that high level of comedy entertainment from you, Yoshi.

LMAO (none / 0) (#2)

by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 26th, 2002 at 09:55:55 PM PST

No kidding. Yoshi rights some funny shit.

HyperText Transport as a CPU extension? And here I thought it was a protocol for server up hypertest documents (web pages). You know http. Next he'll he'll be trying to convice everyone the FTP (File TRanfer Protocol is new!

I had originally planned this diary as a commented rant contained in "koochee girl"'s Asian Imperialism FUD, but I decided to turn it into a point-counterpoint diary entry instead. I've got a diary entry for tomorrow that will definitely be better.

oh, ok (none / 0) (#5)

by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 26th, 2002 at 10:32:55 PM PST

So it will be full of more silliness, misinformation, squabbles, and mixing of facts (if any)?

And shut up all of you, already. It's like
listening to an argument over whether K Mart or Target
is better than Wal-Mart. If this kind of trivia
matters so much to you all, then quit being so
cheap and go buy a good computer.

Listen: the Apple freaks actually noticed that when
they opened their iBooks at Starbucks, the Apple
logo was upside down, as seen by their audiance of
(dare we presume) envious strangers. They, I shit
the not,complained to Apple. Apple, I shit the not,
responded in a flash by turning the logo upside
down so it would look acceptably swank when on
display.

Yoshi, koochee girl, you are Apple freaks at
heart. Go get some money and join your brethren.

I do, I do, I do--Bikini Kill

gots to... (none / 0) (#7)

by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 26th, 2002 at 11:50:13 PM PST

You got to hand it to Apple though. It's better advertising. I have used various notebooks from various vendors. No matter what, someone will always walk over, look at the the thing from all sides (do a kind of 360 degree walk-around). Then they always ask "who makes it?"

People just can't seem to figure things out when it's upside down.

However, I don't think it was so much Mac users that complained. I think it was just one of the stupid people going around like "Apple computers suck becasue when you open the laptops the logo's upside down.

I think it was to mean that you can't run Linux apps under MacOSX (given it's now a *nix). There are however, linux distros designed for the PowerPC (the microprocessor in Macs better known as G3/G4/...)

Why in the world would you do that, though? I mean, you paid good money for the G3/G4 power, just so you could use MacOS, and then you'd go and replace it with a pile of shit like Lunix?

I honestly fail to see the point. I don't generally partake in Mac vs. Windows debates because they're pointless, two operating systems that can basically accomplish the same things. Lunix, on the other hand, is wasting an architecture like the Macintosh by turning it into yet another illegal stool of the KAZAA DDOSing network.

Anyway, my point is, if you're going to spend the money on a Macintosh, why the hell would you then go for Lunix? It's completely pointless and a step backwards if you are a clear thinking Capitalist.

Oh, so typical. (none / 0) (#11)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 02:59:36 AM PST

Do you realize, Koochee, that you are only adding more evidence to support the LFT hypothesis?

Clearly, you don't use Linux, or some flavor of BSD, or any other UNIX-like OS on a contemporary Apple platform, yet you rush to the defense of these hobbyist setups, oblivious to their shortcomings.

Do you think you will ever realise that such ignorant evangelism does more harm than good? Or will you simply take the efficacy of your preferred software ideology on faith, for the rest of your days?

LFT so soon? (5.00 / 1) (#15)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 09:13:46 AM PST

He didn't say anything like "apple r lamerz. They don't open source blah blah blah becau$e they have an agenda again$t linux."

whoopee doodah! (none / 0) (#12)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 04:18:37 AM PST

Clearly, they can't just steal five years of research from Intel.

Yeah during those five years Intel was busy stealing ideas from other companies that had developed 64bit processors years ago.

Check Intel's buying history to see how many SPARCs they bought from Sun Microsystems or Crusoes from Transmeta. 64-bit ain't nothing new.

It does not take a brain surgeon to see what this code-name implies. Asian Manufacturing Devices has long been criticized for their sweatshop labor in small Asian factories, and as a slap in the face of the American way of life, they name their next chip after the Hammer and Sickle, the very symbol of Communism.

Yes I just can't watch CNN without hearing about little Chin Yan be being beaten because he couldn't meet his quota. And I thought the Hammer and Sickle was just part of the Russian flag. I mean no other Communist country uses it.

The Hammer processor will also support DDR (Double Density RAM) of up to 2.7 gigabytes (2700 megabytes). This is hardly an achievement over the Itanium, however, as Intel's next offering supports up to 64 gigabytes of SSR (Single Sided RAM), the faster variant of the two for obvious physical reasons.

And all this time I thought that DDR-SDRAM stood for Double Data Rate-Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory. But would Double Density be better than Single Sided? I mean double density disks store more than single sided. And who manufactures the motherboards that handle 64GB of RAM. I mean I've seen ones that can handle 4GB of DDR-SDRAM or PC-133 SDRAM. Who manufactures this Single Sided Ram? Could you give me a link to some more information about this wonderful technology?

When Intel pledged to bring their EPIC chipset to the Pentium 4 line, many AMD zealots felt like they lost the only edge they have ever had in the processor arena.

Why would Intel backtrack like this? I mean don't they have that pure 64bit processor the Itanic or whatever? I mean it's been out for some time. How come it doesn't sell for shit?

Intel has been porting their EPIC instruction set to the Pentium 4 core for two years, much longer than AMD has spent cobbling together their hacked x86-64 memory bus. Thus, to the shortsighted, it must be seen as "theft."

So Yamhill is out? How come I can't find information about it? Why is the Pentium4 a 32-bit processor? Why won't these supposed 32-64bit P4s run 64bit programs like Windows 2000 64bit Edition? How come they can get a P4 up to 2GHz but they can only get the Itanic to 800MHz?

Go home, NAWL. (none / 0) (#13)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 04:27:31 AM PST

This battle has been lost for a long time.

That goes for Mad Scientist, PotatoError, SpaceGhoti, and "because is isn't," too.

But it is amusing to watch the adversary struggle in a battle they already lost.

You won? (none / 0) (#31)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 07:29:52 PM PST

Really? What did you win? A trip to Hawaii?

In all seriousness, how can you say you won? You didn't change anyone's mind. Sure, a few people chimed in on either side with a bit of agreement, but did anyone at any point say, "hey, I used to agree with the other guy, but now I agree with you?" No.

Perhaps you have some other criterea for determining "victory?" If so, please share.

From where I'm sitting, it looks like nobody won. You wasted a lot of time, a few people had some fun at your expense, and you didn't learn anything from the experience.

Sad.

VICTORY! (none / 0) (#34)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 09:01:07 PM PST

Perhaps you have some other criterea for determining "victory?" If so, please share.

We can provide numerous sources including those from AOL, Microsoft, and Intel that prove they are full of crap. They (Yoshi, osm and the lot) can provide nothing except links to diaries and stories from Adequacy.org that have been picked apart in the very same ways.

We have won. The only thing left of their battle is nervous twitching of body parts from the dead or dying.

Really? (none / 0) (#35)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 11:10:46 PM PST

Was there some sort of armistice signed? Did any of your opponents agree that you had "won?"

What is it about citing some sources that gives you "victory?"

Moreover, where is the fruit of your "victory?" What do you have now, that you didn't have before you were "victorious?"

Your chest-beating over the "twitching body parts" is a bit of a sham, isn't it? After all, aren't all of your opponents alive and well? Aren't they, in fact, still writing exactly the same sorts of things that they were writing before you "defeated" them?

Couldn't you have saved yourself a lot of effort by declaring yourself "victorious" before spending all that time sweating over line by line rebuttals and citing your precious sources?

Yeah during those five years Intel was busy stealing ideas from other companies that had developed 64bit processors years ago.
Check Intel's buying history to see how many SPARCs they bought from Sun Microsystems or Crusoes from Transmeta. 64-bit ain't nothing new.

What? Sun Microsystems makes Java, dumbass. Listen, I could tell you that MUFASA was a 64-bit processor since the 1980s, but it doesn't make it true. Get your facts straight, and then come and debate me. Truth is, the Nintendo 64 was the first 64-bit computing device, a technological marvel that was not achieved again except in the most strenuous laboratory conditions.

And I thought the Hammer and Sickle was just part of the Russian flag. I mean no other Communist country uses it.

It's clearly a Communist emblem, much like the Bald Eagle or Lady Liberty is a symbol of American freedom. It's not on our flag, but it doesn't mean it's not a symbol.

And all this time I thought that DDR-SDRAM stood for Double Data Rate-Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory. But would Double Density be better than Single Sided? I mean double density disks store more than single sided.

Well, I'm glad I could clear that up for you. No, you see, they're both single sided, but Double Density RAM compresses the memory chips onto the chip itself twice as much, yielding frequent overheating and shorting out. Check Tom's Hardware or Anandtech.

And who manufactures the motherboards that handle 64GB of RAM. I mean I've seen ones that can handle 4GB of DDR-SDRAM or PC-133 SDRAM.

4 gigabytes of Double Density RAM is the current limit for the x86 processor core. The Itanium boosts this limit to 64 gigabytes, toppling the "Hammer"'s limit of 2700 Megabytes.

Who manufactures this Single Sided Ram?

Good, solid American companies. Buy it from them for a change, not your Asian-based dime-a-dozen crud.

Why would Intel backtrack like this? I mean don't they have that pure 64bit processor the Itanic or whatever? I mean it's been out for some time. How come it doesn't sell for shit?

They're not backtracking, they're adding additional markets. Much like the Celeron compares to the Pentium, the Pentium is for a different range of consumers than the Itanium. Thus, by bringing the benefits of the Itanium to the Pentium, the consumer is in a win-win situation. Thanks, Intel.

So Yamhill is out? How come I can't find information about it?

No, not yet. Clearly you are confused. They have been secretly working on Yamhill for two years, while AMD has professed their intentions of Hammer for just as long. It's no one's fault but AMD's that they choose to reveal their secrets before they're complete, and it doesn't mean Intel is stealing them.

Why is the Pentium4 a 32-bit processor?

The same reason that every other chip before the Itanium is a 32-bit processor, save one. It's a major physical burden to clock your chip at 64 bits, as it requires a special insoluable metal on the chip. Like I mentioned before, the Nintendo 64 implemented this ground-breaking technology first, and inspired Intel to start doing research into doing the same, with the help of Nintendo.

How would you know? You said they didn't even exist yet. Fabricating arguments is an unacceptable form of debate, and if you think you can get away with it, you're mistaken.

How come they can get a P4 up to 2GHz but they can only get the Itanic to 800MHz?

64-Bit chips must use a new form of malleable and insoluable metal, so this sets the overall megahertz rating back as compared to copper 32-bit processors. Now, if you really want to debate megahertz, I can ask you why two of the same architectures, AMD's Athlon and Intel's Pentium 4, have such drastically different MHz ratings? And AMD feels the need to cover it up?

How come they can get a P4 up to 2GHz but they can only get the Itanic to 800MHz?
64-Bit chips must use a new form of malleable and insoluable metal, so this sets the overall megahertz rating back as compared to copper 32-bit processors.

This is absolute rot. The new metal is only needed if you want to reach 1000 MHz. You can achieve 800 Mhz simply with a titanium endoskeleton.adequacy.org -- because it isn't

ummmm, wait (none / 0) (#19)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 01:25:50 PM PST

Sun Microsystems makes Java, dumbass.

So who makes all those Sun workstations an SPARC processors that go in them? According to their website they make other things like server, desktops/workstations, OSes like SunOS/Solaris, and a lot more. Explain.

Good, solid American companies. Buy it from them for a change, not your Asian-based dime-a-dozen crud.

Could you be more specific? Name a couple of companies.

Check Tom's Hardware or Anandtech.

Well I searched Tom's Hardware and Anandtech. The only things I could find were Single Sided DVD RAM/RW/RW+/etc and single sided tape cartridges. In both cases double density or dual layer would be better wouldn't it?

It's a major physical burden to clock your chip at 64 bits, as it requires a special insoluable metal on the chip.

What the hell does clocking have to do with the number of bits? Are you trying to tell me that overclocking a processor increases the numbers of bits? Then why does a 64bit chip clock under a 32-bit?

Well I searched Tom's Hardware and Anandtech. The only things I could find were [blah blah blah more nerdspeak]. In both cases double density or dual layer would be better wouldn't it?

No. Theoretically, you could get twice the data in the same space, but comparing a 128MB Single Sided RAM chip to a 128MB Double Density RAM will clearly show off SSR's superiority.

Are you trying to tell me that overclocking a processor increases the numbers of bits?

Are you trying to tell me that you are illegally overclocking your processor? That is yet another slap in the face of the DMCA and American Capitalism, and I sincerely hope that the editors have logged your IP token. I keep my processor clocked at 32 bits because it is the legal thing to do.

So who makes all those Sun workstations an SPARC processors that go in them?Xerox.

No, Xerox make copies.

Could you be more specific? Name a couple of companies.Crucial.

couple (n.) Two items of the same kind; a pair.

but comparing a 128MB Single Sided RAM chip to a 128MB Double Density
RAM will clearly show off SSR's superiority.

Is that a single density or double density single sided RAM chip? Is the double density chip you're comparing it to a single sided or double sided chip?

Personally, I buy single sided double density RAM chips, you get the same storage capacity as a double sided single density RAM chip, but you don't have to turn the chip upside-down when you want to access the other side. I am very tempted to buy Dance Dance Revolution RAM (DDR-RAM) because it makes Japanese MP3s sound better.adequacy.org -- because it isn't

You're incredibly ignorant of the industry, and after starting off your post with that, I shouldn't bother wasting my time by replying to you. Unfortunately, I feel I must clear this up for the feeble-minded who may have read your post.

couple (n.) Two items of the same kind; a pair.

Listen. I'm not Consumer Reports, okay? If the original poster refuses to believe me until I cite 30 resources, I don't give a damn. There's your one example, and if you want more, look for them yourself.

Is that a single density or double density single sided RAM chip? Is the double density chip you're comparing it to a single sided or double sided chip?

Single Sided RAM is single-density RAM. Double Density RAM is also single-sided RAM. The major difference is that SSR-RAM runs at a much lower temperature as there is less heat generated between the parts. While you can fit more memory onto a DDR-RAM board, megabyte for megabyte, SSR will always win.

Personally, I buy single sided double density RAM chips

Then you've got an Asian AMD chip, I assume?

I am very tempted to buy Dance Dance Revolution RAM (DDR-RAM) because it makes Japanese MP3s sound better.

What are you, Letterman? This is a serious issue, and I haven't the time to expend my resources countering your flamebait.

Listen. I'm not Consumer Reports, okay? If the original poster refuses to believe me until I cite 30 resources, I don't give a damn. There's your one
example, and if you want more, look for them yourself.

Remind me never to employ you as my barrister.

The major difference is that SSR-RAM runs at a much
lower temperature as there is less heat generated between the parts.

If I wanted to buy a fridge, I'd buy a fridge, not a computer. Single density RAM takes twice the space of double density RAM, only people with chubby fingers buy it.
Again, you fail to convince anyone of your viewpoint.

But, seriously, if you want to convince a skeptical audience, you actually have to back up your allegations, you can't hand-wave them away by telling your critics to "look for themselves" - they already have done, and that's precisely why they're criticising you. The first rule of journalism is to have at least two sources for a story. You have yet to achieve that in any of your speculative musings.adequacy.org -- because it isn't

good one (none / 0) (#27)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 04:52:20 PM PST

But, seriously, if you want to convince a skeptical audience, you actually have to back up your allegations, you can't hand-wave them away by telling your critics to "look for themselves" - they already have done, and that's precisely why they're criticising you. The first rule of journalism is to have at least two sources for a story. You have yet to achieve that in any of your speculative musings.

In other words it is your job to inform the reader with mutliple resources. Telling the reader to look up the information themselves is not good journalism. Then when the reader 'looks it up themselves' and critics your points you need to provide further information

Yoshi like PC Magazine. In the letters section when someone critics an article they don't respond by saying "wello your a stupid linux hacker looking at communist web sites. We are right and you're wrong". No, they respond in a manner such as, "if you visit www.thecompanywebsite.com/somewhere/information.html you will find that are artcle was very accurate.

External (nonAdequacy.org non personal homepages) sources is what's necessary. If you refer to the Intel Intanium processor you link to information about that processor.

This the the right way

The IntelItanium is a 64-bit processor which Intel hopes will spawn a new market of higher end servers. However, according to an article from The Register the Itanium is not selling as expected. Intel must then look to other option such as the Yamhill.

This is the WRONG way

The Intel Itanium is a 64-bit processor. AMD, a 3rd world company in asia which uses child labor stole the technology. The linux hacker spies will use it in their newest processor called Hammer (cannot provide a recent link to the communist Russina flag as Russia is no longer a communist country nor does it fly that flag). We are providing the information to spread the word on how this hurts just and loyal companies who have never done anything wrong and only wish to support capitalism. We don't have to provide proof. We are smart decent and good. You are stupid linux hackers and will believe us because we are right.

wasting OUR time (none / 0) (#23)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 03:23:34 PM PST

Xerox. The SPARC chips are named after their manufacturing facility in South Palo Alto, California. Sun just makes the Java OS that powers it.

Short for ScalableProcessor Architecture, a RISC technology developed by Sun Microsystems. The term SPARCŪ itself is a trademark of SPARC International, an independent organization that licenses the term to Sun for its use. Sun's workstations based on the SPARC include the SPARCstation, SPARCserver, Ultra1, Ultra2 and SPARCcluster.

In the world of Xerox, PARC stands for Palo Alto Research Center. Also Sun does not develop JavaOS. JOS is an independent open source operating system written in Java.

Listen. I'm not Consumer Reports, okay? If the original poster refuses to believe me until I cite 30 resources, I don't give a damn. There's your one example, and if you want more, look for them yourself.

Crucial lists DDR as Double Data Rate.

Are you trying to tell me that you are illegally overclocking your processor? That is yet another slap in the face of the DMCA and American Capitalism, and I sincerely hope that the editors have logged your IP token. I keep my processor clocked at 32 bits because it is the legal thing to do.

First off there is nothing in the DMCA which says you cannot overclock processors. If I am wrong please list the section which deals with this. You also have to remember that not every country has DMCA legislation and therefore it means nothing. Canada is a prime example.

Overclocking has nothing to do with increasing a processor from 32 to 64bits. The number of data traces and channels does not change. It involves increasing the clockspeed (frequency which is measured in megahertz). There are a number of ways to do this but I won't list them here as Yoshi, elenchos, or osm will likely complain that I am writing a HOWTO.

Seeing as how I am not using a modem and thus for no V-chip (I can't believe I talking gibberish like that) nor am I on a token ring network, IP token bullshit means nothing to me. The logs will show my IP address though. However, since I am using a dynamic IP address (assigned by my ISP) rather than a static IP, good luck.

You're incredibly ignorant of the industry...

I think every industry professional laughing at you, documentation (including the MCSE documentation), and self respecting webmaster would show it's the other way around.

In the world of Xerox, PARC stands for Palo Alto Research Center. Also Sun does not develop JavaOS. JOS is an independent open source operating system written in Java.

Are you this clueless on all plateaus of knowledge? Xerox manufacturers the SPARC chip at its SPARC headquarters in South Palo Alto. Why the hell would you be under the impression that some other company manufacturers the Java OS? Sun makes it for Xerox's SPARC computers.

First off there is nothing in the DMCA which says you cannot overclock processors.

It's in blatant violation of the EULA! For the sake of the good Lord, you are immensely frustrating. How could you possibly fathom that taking a chip that you paid for and ILLEGALLY hacking it into running faster?! Have you no reasoning?

Overclocking has nothing to do with increasing a processor from 32 to 64bits. The number of data traces and channels does not change.

When you are over'clocking' your processor, you actually set the 'clock bus rate' to a larger interval than it is designed to run at. Essentially, you're cheating the company who manufactured the chip and quoted it as a legitimate, 32-bit processor.

There are a number of ways to do this but I won't list them here as Yoshi, elenchos, or osm will likely complain that I am writing a HOWTO.

Not to mention that doing such would put the entire readership of Adequacy.org in jeopardy when the FBI asks for the logs. You, Sir, are a very selfish individual.

Seeing as how I am not using a modem and thus for no V-chip [...], IP token bullshit means nothing to me. [emphasis added]

So let me get this straight. You're not using a modem? That's grounds for arrest right there. I'm positive you're just tapping into the internet lines of either your neighbor or another unsuspecting Internet consumer. Then, you go on to say you have no V-Chip, another blatant violation of the DMCA, as you either removed it or fried it out with "Red Hat". I don't know about you, but if I were you, I would watch what I do from now on.

I think every industry professional laughing at you, documentation (including the MCSE documentation), and self respecting webmaster would show it's the other way around.

Excuse me, I am a self-respecting webmaster, and I have read MCSE books (I've got an Access 2002 book on my desk right now). Evidently you are the one we are all mocking.

Please stop posting against yourself in disguise. Might I remind you it is cowardly to build straw effigies of your opponents, rather than debate them directly. I'm even beginning to doubt the authenticity of "Tim" and "Pete".adequacy.org -- because it isn't

actually (none / 0) (#29)

by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 27th, 2002 at 06:40:10 PM PST

It seems that you are assuming that I am Yoshi. Please stop this. I write rather informed intelligent posts so as to debunk the bullshit flooding this site from osm and his other luser account Yoshi.

osm and Yoshi are the same person.

I am an industry expert! Bullshit! An expert in what.

I post Anonymously because I don't waste my time with this shithole. Controversial my ass.

I write rather informed intelligent posts so as to debunk the bullshit flooding this site from osm and his other luser account Yoshi.

Perhaps you can believe me when I say that Yoshi is not osm. Yoshi is a paranoid delusional fantasist, prone to fits of raging incoherence. You should keep this in mind when you reply to him. He is, as we say in the trade, "b1ll G4t3$ b1tch".adequacy.org -- because it isn't

"Naked disabled paedophiles hack Microsoft with stolen unpatriotic spells", is it? Go for it jsm, only you could do the matter justice.adequacy.org -- because it isn't

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective
companies.
Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org.
The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most
Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source
Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part
of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written
permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by
the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to
legal@adequacy.org.